Weekend Box Office Wrap Up: Jan 20 2013

Jessica Chastain dominated this week’s box office, securing the top two spots, while the other new releases flopped big time.

At number 1 this weekend is the horror film Mama (read our review) with $28 million. Starring the aforementioned Jessica Chastain, as well as Game of Thrones star Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Mama is director Andrés Muschietti’s feature length adaptation of his own short film, produced by Guillermo Del Toro.

The film was made for a reported $15 million, meaning it was already turning a profit (barring any outrageous marketing costs) by midday Saturday. And, as Texas Chainsaw 3D revealed, audiences in January love their horror films.

Coming in at number 2 is Zero Dark Thirty, Kathryn Bigelow’s procedural drama centered on the real-life hunt for Osama Bin Laden, with $17.6 million. Now at $55 million to-date, Zero Dark Thirty is Bigelow’s highest grossing film yet.

Silver Linings Playbook is the number 3 film this weekend with $11.4 million, which brings its domestic total up to $55 million. Needless to say, don’t expect this film to fall off the top 10 anytime soon.

Ruben Fleischer’s stylish noir picture Gangster Squadcomes in at number 4 with $9.1 million. We’d already touched upon the film’s less-than-desirable debut in last week’s box office report, but luckily the film has been able to accrue $32 million thus far.

In at number 5 is Broken City (read our review), director Allen Hughes’ political thriller, with $9 million. An under $10 million opening weekend has got to be disappointing for Fox, especially for a film with such a star-studded cast.

In all fairness, though, the film’s trailers did it no favors, and poor reviews certainly couldn’t have helped. Still, it’s hard to imagine a film starring Mark Wahlberg and Russell Crowe flopping. Luckily, there was another new release that preformed even worse than Broken City.

A Haunted House is the number 6 film this weekend with $8.3 million. It was a pretty sizeable drop for the found footage spoof, but $29 million off a budget of $2.5 million is not bad at all.

This weekend’s number 7 film is Django Unchained with $8.2 million, which brings its domestic total up to $138 million. The film may not have come away with the top prize at last Sunday’s Golden Globes, but awards for actor Christoph Waltz and Quentin Tarantino (for best screenplay) are surely signs of future accolades.

In at number 8 is Les Misérables with $7.8 million. Tom Hooper’s adaptation of the beloved musical is now up to $130 million in domestic grosses.

In at number 9 is The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey with $6.4 million. Peter Jackson’s blockbuster film – the first part of a new trilogy – is up to $287 million, and is inching closer and closer to the $1 billion worldwide mark every week (it passed the $900 million mark this weekend).

Coming in at number 10 (yes, you read that right) is Arnold Schwarzenegger’s first starring role in nearly a decade, The Last Stand (read our review), with $6.3 million. This makes The Last Stand Arnold’s weakest opening for a film since the ’80s.

Apparently, no amount of tank rides or Johnny Knoxville could get audiences interested in Schwarzenegger’s return to action. Though, to be fair, he has been out of the game for a while. Hopefully, the studios behind Schwarzenegger’s next two films – Ten and The Tomb – can avoid a 9th place, under $10 million opening.

51 Comments

Post a Comment

Want to change your avatar?Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Rules: No profanity or personal attacks. Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Johnny3Piece 2 years ago

When I read on Saturday that the numbers for The Last Stand weren’t looking good, I thought that somebody screwed up their facts. Looks like nobody was really interested in seeing Schwarzenegger at the moment. It could also be the fact that there are a bunch of better Best Picture contenders that are in theaters to go see at the moment. I wonder exactly why this film did not draw audiences. Anybody have any ideas?

I felt bad for Arnold, but The Last Stand just does not look like a very interesting film, so I was afraid that this might happen, not necessarily due to lack of interest in him, but rather, the movie itself. I hope it does not effect the existing plans for Legend of Conan, which I think could be a major hit.

By the way, I say that as an Arnold fan. The commercials for The Last Stand just do not appeal to me, nor do some of the co-stars in it, mainly Johnny Knoxville. Had Arnold started his comeback with Legend of Conan, or a sequel to Predator or The Terminator, I would have been there this weekend. I may have even seen Ten or The Tomb this weekend, had one of them been his starting vehicle. This, however, was just a poor choice for him to make.

I agree. It doesn’t really offer anything special. I am starting to wonder how Stallone’s film Bullet to the Head will fare in theaters considering it feels somewhat similar. I’ll eventually see The Last Stand but I didn’t reallyu feel compelled to see the movie because it didn’t really look like a classic Arnold film.

@Johnny3Piece – I think for one, Arnold pulling off a believable action film at 65 is not really possible, eventhough the film does’nt look like it’s terrible and i might check it out later, or definantly on DVD. Since Arnold was never known as a great actor in his heyday to begin with, he’s at a disadvantage. Now look at a great actors like Pacino, Denzel, De Niro, Nicholson, Hopkins, Day Lewis, etc, it’s easy to see guys like that working and still being effective well into their 60′s and 70′s because great acting unlike physicallity does’nt deteriate.

Almost all of the actors you have mentioned have had flops as well, and Arnold is not the absolutely terrible actor some would like to make him out to be. Had he not been believable in Predator and Terminator, for example, those films would not have been nearly as big as they were. I just believe this was a relatively unappealing movie for him to make his return. Like I said, had he started with Legend of Conan, I think the news would be different this morning.

@Jeff – They have all had flops, any actor that’s been in the game long enough will have flops, i don’t care who you are. That being said do you think any of those actors i mentioned are not great because of a flop, i highly doubt anyone would be foolish enough to think that. My only point is because they’re ‘Great’ actors they’ll be effecive on the big screen far longer than Arnold. When your roles rely heavily on a ‘Physical’ nature, you know as well as i do that as you get older you won’t be able to do at 50,60 what you could do at 20,30 and even 40, that’s the point i’m making.

We agree. I’m just saying that I still believe Arnold has a few hits in him. I will be surprised, for example, if Legend of Conan does indeed get made, if it is not a success.

The exception to your rule might be Clint Eastwood. Although perhaps known more for his action and grittiness back in the day, and not necessarily being a “great” actor, he has traversed time well, playing his age and making profitable movies now into his 80′s. He’s even considered a Hollywood legend, at this point.

@Jeff – Right, i’m not saying Arnold is hopeless by any means, i just think his days as a strong leading character are most likely behind him. I think he’ll probally be better suited sharing the spotlight in films. He might be more of a complete the puzzle kind of guy than the whole puzzle these days, like in the “Expendables 2″ which he was pretty damn good in. Now don’t get wrong, i will be seeing “The Last Stand”.

Congrats to The Hobbit. Over 900 million worldwide and likely to hit one billion, once it opens in China. The movie is far better than the 65% it garnered from the critics on Rotten Tomatoes, as the 81% approval it got from fans on the same site attests.

Id say a 20% jump is expected by fans, battleship has a 25% and 40 something by fans. Id say that 81% are mostly fans if the series. Which may cloud their judgment in some ways. Which is good cause fans should enjoy it, we dont need a star wars repeat.

Definitely not comparable to the mistake that was Star Wars Ep’s 1-3. I personally don’t know one fan of The Lord of the Rings who disliked The Hobbit, although I am sure that there are some out there. Personally, after reading some of the criticisms of the film from the critics, I feel much of it is unfounded. Some, for example, have complained that it is too much like Lord of the Rings. I mean, really?! The story is from the same author, it contains some of the same characters, and the movie was produced by the same director with some of the same actors. Why should it not be like The Lord of the Rings? And if you liked the former, then why not like the latter? Anyway, it definitely looks like it will push past the one billion dollar mark, so kudos to them for a job well done.

That is an odd and unbelievable excuse for not likeing the film. I didnt like the film but i have reasons, also i was not a fan of the trilogy. A big thing is that it did come after one of the greatest trilogies in cinema so that hurt it, along with the 48 fps that hurt the film for some.

I think you hit the nail on the head, that people’s expectations were far too high for The Hobbit because the LOTR trilogy set the bar so high, i enjoyed the film, but like the LOTR franchise i expect it to get progressively better with each film, there was a lot of introductions to get through that the aforementioned sequels won’t have to do, at least not to nearly the same extent.

I also think it had to do with the different tone of The Hobbit, it’s a lot more lighthearted, not the dark and grim storylines that was the LOTR trilogy, i think that turned a lot of people off, but i knew that going in so i wasn’t surprised by it.

And that one + billion worldwide is just for the first movie, so in essence, the production company already made an immense profit on their product, with two more movies still to go. My guess is that the second movie, The Desolation of Smaug, will outperform the first (since the dragon will be featured), and the third movie will be on par with the second, so when it is all said and done, we are talking about three + billion, potentially.

@Jeff – I agree, this certainly has the potential to be the first movie franchise to have 3 films gross 1b at the box office iniatially. ‘The Avengers’ will join it a few years later when the 3rd film in it’s series is released. Outside of ‘The Hobbit’ sequel, i don’t see many films in 2013 that have the potential to reach 1 billion worldwide, maybe “Iron Man 3″, but i’m hard pressed to find another film that can reach that plataeu. I know with ‘The Hobbit’ four films from 2012 will have reached 1 billion, but last year was the exception to the rule in my opinion. 2012 was just a beast of a year at the box office, we might end up with as many as 32 films from 2012 to go over 100 million domestic.

Haven’t heard about an Avengers trilogy, just a planned sequel, but I hope you are right, as that was my second favorite movie of the year. I love Middle Earth, but the comic book movies are equally as enjoyable, when they are done well, and Avengers succeeded in that regard.

@Jeff – Marvel Studios has’nt made any plans official yet on a third film, but you just know one is coming. The first film was indeed fantastic, and if Whedon and company approach the sequel with the same energy, fun and imagination, stay determined and maintain a strong focus, it has the potential to reach 2 billion worldwide in my opinion.

Jeff 2 years ago

I just hope the Avengers sequel is good. Frankly, I was amazed that the first one was so good, because I thought that, with so many characters, it would have been campy and/or scattered. I hope they don’t follow the comic book trend of adding more and more characters in the sequel or any film thereafter, because more often than not, the characters and story get lost as a result.

Ronnie 2 years ago

The Last Stand isn’t exactly what I was looking for when it comes to Arnie’s return to cinema so I didn’t bother watching it. Ten, however, will likely have my money (assuming it doesn’t have such a campy tone).

Not blaming it all on this, but it sure didnt help.. But i dont think Last Stand wasnt playing on many screens. Half the theaters in my city didnt even have the movie playing at all and the ones that did, only had about 4-5 showtimes through out the day. Ive heard others complain about this as well

Nick and Ronnie, see my comments above. I am an Arnold fan, but this movie just did not appeal to me…didn’t look interesting. I would bet that others felt the same way, so that, I think, was the problem.

I wanted to see this on Friday, but my local theater wasn’t showing it. The closest theater showing it was almost 1/2 hour away and it just wasn’t worth it to me to drive there to see it. Hopefully it ends up here next week and stop showing The Hobbit on 2 screens.

Oh, I’ll see it eventually, but likely on DVD. I’m a great Clint Eastwood fan, but to this day, I have not seen The Bridges of Madison County, just because the movie did not appeal to me. Arnold made a poor choice here, in my opinion. If I remember correctly, he also wanted to start his comeback with a cartoon on TV called The Governator, which was an even bigger poor choice, but that fell apart after the news of his affair came out. I think he needs to exercise a bit, get back in a little better shape, or at least tone himself up some more (I know he is 65 now), and get some outside input on what films he should be making. I am fairly sure Legend of Conan, if made, will be a success, as will a Predator or Terminator sequel, if he is cast right in them (e.g., not the cyborg in The Terminator, but perhaps a soldier whose DNA is stolen from him, or perhaps, the engineer/scientist who created the robot). The Last Stand, with Johnny Knoxville and the premise in general, just does not make me want to spend the money.

f*** domestic sales is all i gotta say. last stand hasn’t opened up global yet so it flopping domestically doesn’t mean jack, sure it might not be his best movie and he may not be in his prime, but movies like this make their green internationally (as seen with expendables 2).

@Jeff – I think the ‘Avengers’ sequel has a very good chance of being good and even great. If you look at many CBM in general the second films tend to get even better like “X2″, “Spider-Man 2″, “The Incredible Hulk” & “TDK” for examples. Now of course that’s not always the case like “Iron Man 2″ which i thought was good, but was’nt up to par with “Iron Man”. I could always be wrong, but i just think the sequel has a good chance of being fantastic as well, epsepcially with the same director, writer, producers and cast returning. The potential for an epic sequel is there.

Jeff i hear your point of not wanting to see more characters, but that’s exactly what has to happen, especially if your taking on villians the scale of ‘Thanos’. I can tell you now that the line up the ‘Avengers’ had in the first film just won’t be enough to take on a destructive force like ‘Thanos’, especailly if he get’s hold of the ‘Infinity Guauntlet’ like we all believe he eventually will. Besides if there’s no new charcters introduced in the sequels, than that would mean no ‘Black Panther’, ‘Ms. Marvel’, ‘Ant-Man’,’Wasp’ or ‘Vision’, and that just would’nt sit too well with me or many others my friend.

I’m more concerned with multiple villains than multiple heros. I believe what has left a bad taste in my mouth is the original Batman and Spiderman franchises, wherein the sequels kept adding more and more characters, and the movies kept getting more and more foolish and fractured. Avengers was a fluke, of sorts, thanks to the skilled writing and directing skills of Josh Wheadon. That movie could have gone wrong in so many ways, but with the quality and success of the first one, he built a good foundation for a franchise, and fortunately, he is taking on the reigns for the sequel. I think there also needs to be some constraint in storytelling, as there is an inclination, with sequels, to keep expanding their scopes, until there is no place left to go that has not already been ventured. (e.g. Don’t really want to see a series of movies wherein the world is threatened with destruction over and over and over again. Gets tedious and ridiculous, IMO.) I completely trust the second one will be good, but not so sure about any thereafter, especially if a new writer/director is brought on and he/she feels compelled to try to go “bigger and better”.

@Jeff – You miss the point, the ‘Avengers’ consists of more than what you seen in the movie. I do get what you’re saying about too many heros in some Comic book films, but the ‘Avengers’ is a different beast, it’s made to have a big team of heroes, just like the ‘Justice League’. You might not understand it all, but you’ll come to understand in future sequels. As far as the ‘Avengers’ being good is a fluke, i beg to differ. You forget that Joss Whedon is also a comic book writer as well as geek, so he understands the material like the back of his head, in short words he know his s…. So i was not suprised at the quality of the film, because it came from him. Now was i suprised by the money the film made yes, those numbers really blew me away. I’m sorry you don’t want to see it my friend, but i want to see ‘T’challa’ in that world of Wakanda. ‘Black Panther’ is such a great complex character, you would have to be crazy not to want to see that on the big screen. And ‘Ant-Man’ is a founding memeber of the ‘Avengers’, his film is the works so it’s inevitable we’ll be seeing him in future installments of ‘Avengers’ sequels. But i want to see ‘Dr.Strange’ & ‘Hero’s For Hire’ with their solo films as well, Marvel has a vast catalog of terrific characters to work with in the future.

You beat me back before I was able to refine my comments. Haha. I understand that the Avengers is a different animal, as there would be no need for them to assemble, but for a large, world threat. The fluke to which I referrenced was indeed more related to the mammoth amount of money that the movie made, but also how exceptionally well done it was, even considering Wheadon’s background. Now as for added characters, I would much prefer that they have their own individual movies first, so as to allow for character background and development. Otherwise, I fear it will feel like they are just being thrown into the mix, without adding anything to the flavor. (Leaving now, and will be gone for two days, and thus, unable to repond to any further dialogue. Will catch up with you later.)

@Jeff – I agree with you there, they should be introduced in their solo films first. Especially ‘Black Panther’ & ‘Ant-Man’. Marvel just needs to saty on their original path like how they introduced ‘Iron Man’, ‘Hulk’, ‘Thor’ & ‘Cap’ in their own films, it makes the ‘Avengers’ films that much more rewarding and richer because we’ve gotten to know the charcters and devolped an understanding of them as well as a connection to them. You nailed it there, that was big key to “The Avengers” success, there was no need for origin stories to hold the film back and drag it down. Whedon was able to fly right out the gate with a fluid story and superb execution in my opinion. Talk to you soon Jeff, take care.

@Jeff – One more thing, you think the success of “The Avengers” was a fluke, i think it was more of a suprise. Now i did expect it to be a big smash, but more like 350-400 million domestic and 800m- 1 billion worldwide, so the film definantly far exceeded my expectations. Now if the sequel’s numbers are far less impressive, than it might well prove to be more of a ‘fluke’ or catching lightning in a bottle once, though i have a feeling tha’s not going to be the case here. I think this sequel is poised to be another monster at the box office and possibly even more successful, it’s just up to Whedon and company to make sure it’s executed right.

@Jenn Blade – Arnold was definantly a great action film star in his prime, but that fades as you get older due to the physical nature of that kind of film. As i was saying the other day, if you’re a great actor you can continnue to shine on the screen even as you age. Since Arnold has never been a great actor, his options become limited.